Originally posted November 26 2016
The Protestant Bible, of which the NIV is one version, is seven books shorter than the Bible used by Roman Catholics. But Protestants didn’t just take out books; they used a different standard of what should be in the Bible (Coffman, 2008).
The Hebrew Bible has 24 books. This list, or “canon,” was affirmed at the Councils of Jamnia in A.D. 90 and 118. The Protestant Old Testament includes exactly the same information, but organized into 39 books. For example, the Hebrew Bible has one book of Samuel, while the Protestant Bible has I and II Samuel—same book, but divided into two parts (Coffman, 2008).
In addition to these 39 books, the Catholic Old Testament includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Baruch (includes the Letters of Jeremiah), I and II Maccabees, and additions to Daniel and Esther. These books were included in the Septuagint, a Greek translation of a different Hebrew canon. Early church fathers, who relied on the Septuagint (they could read Greek, but not Hebrew), sometimes quoted these books as Scripture. The status of the books continued to be debated throughout the Middle Ages (Coffman, 2008).
At the time of the Reformation, Protestants decided that, because the additional books weren’t in the Hebrew Bible, they shouldn’t be in the Christian Bible, either (though they were included in early editions of the King James Bible). Catholics, at the Council of Trent (1546), decided to keep the “deutero-canonical” books (Coffman, 2008).
Incidentally, Protestants and Catholics use the same New Testament, the content of which was defined by Athanasius in 367 (Coffman, 2008).
What is Apocrypha?
These are a group of writings which are considered part of Old Testament Scripture by the Roman Catholic church but are not accepted as inspired by the Protestant church and Judaism.
The word Apocrypha means “hidden.” The Apocrypha refers to the fifteen books (fourteen if the Letter of Jeremiah is put with Baruch) written between the years 300 B.C. and 100 B.C. (except Esdras which was written about A.D. 100). Eleven of these fourteen books are considered Holy Scripture by the Roman Catholic church. When added to the Old Testament, they constitute only seven extra books because the others are attached to existing books. The Apocrypha is about the size of the New Testament (Stewart, 1993).
Stewart (1993) continues: The Protestant reformers, particularly in the sixteenth century, pointed out many abuses in the Roman Catholic church at that time. From 1545 to 1563 a church council met at Trent to answer some of their charges. Among their decisions was the pronouncement of these books as Holy Scripture. Before that time they were not regarded by the Roman Catholic church as sacred Scripture. The Protestant church rejects them for the following reasons:
No Claim
The primary reason for rejecting the Apocrypha as Scripture is that there is no claim within the books that they are inspired by God. This is in contrast to the canonical Scriptures which claim to record the revelation of God.
Never Cited
Though the New Testament cites directly or alludes to almost every book of the Old Testament as Scripture, it never cites the Apocrypha as being God’s Word. If the Apocrypha were considered Scripture by the people living in the first century, we would certainly expect them to refer to it in some way.
The New Testament does refer to the Apocrypha in Jude 14 and Hebrews 11:35 but does not cite it as holy Scripture. It cites the works the same way Paul cited heathen poets (Acts 17:28). This demonstrates that the New Testament writers were familiar with the Apocrypha but did not consider them to be upon the same level as Old Testament Scripture.
Rejected by the Jews
The Jews have never considered these works to be inspired. On the contrary, they denied their inspiration. At the time of Christ we have the testimony of the Jewish writer Flavius Josephus that they were only twenty-two books to be inspired by God. The books of the Apocrypha were not among these.
Not on Early Lists
In the early years of the church it drew up various lists of the books it considered to be Scripture. The books of the Apocrypha do not appear on any list until the fourth century.
Rejected by Many Catholic Scholars
Many Roman Catholic scholars, through the Protestant Reformation, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture. There was no unanimity of opinion among them that these books should be considered Scripture.
Demonstrable Errors
The Apocrypha also contains demonstrable errors. For example, Tobit was supposedly alive when Jereboam staged his revolt in 931 B.C. and was still alive when the Assyrians captured the Northern kingdom of Israel in 721 B.C. This means that he lived over two hundred years! However, the Book of Tobit says he lived only 158 years (Tobit 1:3-5; 14:11). This is an obvious contradiction. Other examples could be cited. Those who believe in an inerrant Scripture cannot accept the Apocrypha as God’s Word.
No Evidence of Inspiration
The books of the Apocrypha do not contain anything like predictive prophecy that would give evidence of their inspiration. If these books were inspired by God, then we should expect to see some internal evidence confirming it. But there is none.
Old Testament Complete
It is clear that in the first century the Old Testament was complete. The Hebrews accepted the same thirty-nine books, (although divided differently) that the Protestant church does today. Jesus put His stamp of approval on these books but said nothing concerning the Apocrypha. However, He did say that the Scriptures were the authoritative Word of God and could not be broken. Any adding to that which God has revealed is denounced in the strongest of terms. Therefore, we have the testimony of Jesus against the authenticity of the Apocrypha.
We conclude that the Apocrypha should not be considered canonical because the books do not demonstrate themselves to be upon the same level as Scripture. Jesus did not consider it part of His Old Testament and we are told not to add or subtract anything from God’s Word.
Did Jude Quote from the Book of Enoch?
The Book of Jude seemingly contains a quotation of the intertestamental Book of Enoch. The question results from a citation found in Jude 14 (Stewart, 1993).
Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men saying, ‘Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints’ (Jude 14).
Jude records a prophecy made by Enoch, who lived before the flood of Noah. Enoch predicted the coming of the Lord to judge wicked individuals. The Apostle Paul wrote of this same judgment (II Thessalonians 1:7-10). This prophecy made by Enoch is not recorded in the Old Testament. Two questions arise: (1) Where did Jude obtain his information? (2) Was Jude’s information correct?
During the period between the testaments the Book of Enoch was written. It contains this prophecy. Some assume that Jude obtained this prophecy from the Book of Enoch, but this is not the case. Jude does not quote from the Book of Enoch but rather directly from Enoch. This could have been by means of special revelation from God or from some now unknown written source. The source of Jude’s quotation was the person Enoch. Where the Book of Enoch derived his information is another matter. It is possible that the source of the quotation found in the Book of Enoch was Jude, since there is no evidence as to the precise contents of the Book of Enoch until several centuries after Jude was written. Whatever the answer may be. It is not necessary to assume that Jude considered the Book of Enoch as authoritative (Stewart, 1993).
Since we believe that Jude’s writing was inspired by God, we take this information as being correct. It is not essential to know how Jude obtained this information. Jesus had promised that His disciples would be indwelt by the Holy Spirit, who would guide them into all truth (Stewart, 1993).
However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak (John 16:13). Because of Jesus’ promise, the words of the New Testament writers were safeguarded from error (Stewart, 1993).
We conclude that Jude did not quote from the Book of Enoch, but received the information in some other way (Stewart, 1993).
REFERENCES:
Coffman, E. (2008, August). Why are Protestant and Catholic Bibles different? | Christian History. Retrieved November 19, 2016, from Christianity Today: http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/2008/august/why-are-protestant-and-catholic-bibles-different.html
Stewart, D. (1993). What Everyone Needs To Know About The Bible. Orange, California, USA: Dart Press.
Ben-David Ministries 